This is based on under-25 talent. This is from ESPN Insider. The Texans, Chiefs and Panthers are at the top. Basically they took all teams and looked at guys who will be under 25 as of Sept 1. Then they rate that talent. Kind of a way to look at guys at the back of your roster, etc.

Playing Devil's Advocate here it is pretty subjective. They say Mario is the best young player at his position...debatable, depending on what season you discuss. It throws Amobi in there as inconsistent but still 23. It mentions Barwin, etc. Reading the list of the other teams, I'm not really sure what they evaluated it all on.

This is based on under-25 talent. This is from ESPN Insider. The Texans, Chiefs and Panthers are at the top. Basically they took all teams and looked at guys who will be under 25 as of Sept 1. Then they rate that talent. Kind of a way to look at guys at the back of your roster, etc.

Playing Devil's Advocate here it is pretty subjective. They say Mario is the best young player at his position...debatable, depending on what season you discuss. It throws Amobi in there as inconsistent but still 23. It mentions Barwin, etc. Reading the list of the other teams, I'm not really sure what they evaluated it all on.

I'd rather review a total team roster or starters rather than this type of break down. Since it is not just the "young guys"playing it does not help much. Ok, we have a good group of young players.

Why I don't like about the article is that it really is just a crap shoot on what they say, depending on the team. The Texans have alot of guys under 25. They can say Slaton is an up and comer and Okoye is only 23. Then they will say Felix Jones has been injured alot for Dallas and that LeRon Landry is a complete flop for Washington. Slaton has been hurt and had a bad year and Okoye has been a flop. It just seems like on each team they kind of labeled guys and the teams with alot of young players came through at the top. Though the Texans have more talent than the Panthers and Chiefs.

hopefully all the potential and talent will translate into wins. myself, i think veterans are important in this league, specifically veterans who are leaders and have won before.

the team is more than a little flat at times. the team needs to learn to finish and chances are Gary isn't going to impart that to them if he hasn't done it after four years. i think a little veteran leadership and heart could have gone a long way to compensate for some of our deficiencies. they are going with all youth and hopefully it works out.

if it doesn't, we may have to tweak our philosophy and be more aggressive to add from the outside and even guys that are veterans. nothing wrong with a veteran at all. you need them.

I know no one wants to hear it, but you've got to kick out that first year. Kubiak's 4 years, IMO started in 2007, and I think he's been doing a mighty fine job.

I don't think this should turn into a Kubiak thread. But, a "mighty fine job" should have produced a playoff season, or two. I think it's more fair to say that Kubiak has done just enough to keep his job.